I see it differently. The movie can be attributed with bringing in new people to the game, and as such it also brought innovation of the sport. Which for some I guess is a bad thing, I imagine those people think that innovation of the sport is a bad thing. I know that some also see the extra crowds and think that is also a bad thing. I can understand that, but how many of those would be gear fishing (not that there is anything wrong with that) instead of fly fishing? Could be that the movie has saved more resources than what is perceived by the initial thought of the increased crowds.Life was good ..before "the movie"...
In my opinion, you are flat out ridiculous sometimes. But yeah, ok "YOU" don't think there has been a lot of innovation since the movie. At least this time you aren't attempting to state your opinion as a fact of the universe.Hmm i don't think there has been a lot of innovation since the movie. there however has been a ton of exploitation
That might just be a matter of perspective though.
everyone is ridiculous sometimes.. I think the exploitation is simply a lack of management. You are right increased awareness has been achieved I am not sure what that awareness has accomplished.In my opinion, you are flat out ridiculous sometimes. But yeah, ok "YOU" don't think there has been a lot of innovation since the movie. At least this time you aren't attempting to state your opinion as a fact of the universe.
As for exploitation, you think the exploitation wouldn't have happened without the movie? I think this is a naive way of thinking about things. I on the other hand think that the increased population of fly fisherman increased awareness of larger issues.
I believe for you it always comes back to your beloved steelhead and that's the lens by which you see everything related to fly fishing, but the sport is much bigger than that. Even so, the demise of the steelhead has little to do with "exploitation" caused by an increase in the number of fly fisherman who target the fish because of a movie.
Again, I think you are talking about steelhead here and once again I don't think it is the number of people as much as it is the lack of fish. If there were more fish spread out in more places than the people would also spread out. You see more people targeting the fish because there are less opportunities to fish for them. So the people who want to fish for them have to drive to where the fish are. Increased awareness of the scarcity is better than decreased awareness.The problem is that the number of people wanting to fish certain fish in certain places has increased so much that opportunity for a quality experience has actually decreased.
In all fairness, while us geezers were enjoying crowd-free rivers with decent runs of fish before and well before the movie, the devastating damage to the watersheds was being done and that is way more destructive then the influx of new fly-tossers.I don't recall, did the 2 rod endorsement come after "the movie"? That and "strike indicators" (aka bobbers), certainly could be considered innovations.